MSF donations

You are here

Evaluation Reports

Some evaluation reports are public and can be downloaded from this website, while others are restricted to MSF users and can only be accessed via Tukul. This limitation is mainly due to the sensitive nature of the operational contexts and the resulting content. However, there are internal discussions about making all evaluation reports publicly searchable. If you are an MSF association member, reports are made available on various associate platforms such as www.insideOCB.com.

The evaluation looks at the process for managing MSF-OCP's construction/rehabilitation projects since 2012. The main problems identified are not related to the process itself, but the way it is put into application. The main users pointed out the long delays (periods of indicision) as being the biggest difficulty, followed by budget/cost issues (cost/m² estimates) , and the quality of constructions (techniques, materials, etc). One of the root causes of delays relates to unclear/incomplete definition of roles and responsibilities = actions to take.

This is a comprehensive evaluation of OCA's in country emergency response units in Nigeria, Chad, North Kivu, South Kivu and Katanga. The report consists of the transversal analysis of all of the ERUs as well as the individual evaluations of each specific ERU project. The outcomes have been reduced into Management Summary Charts found on p.8 of the report.

by Juan Luis Dominguez and Timothy McCann, supported by the Stockholm Evaluation Unit

This is a comprehensive evaluation of OCA's in country emergency response units in Nigeria, Chad, North Kivu, South Kivu and Katanga. The report consists of the transversal analysis of all of the ERUs as well as the individual evaluations of each specific ERU project. The outcomes have been reduced into Management Summary Charts found on p.8 of the report.

This is a comprehensive evaluation of OCA's in country emergency response units in Nigeria, Chad, North Kivu, South Kivu and Katanga. The report consists of the transversal analysis of all of the ERUs as well as the individual evaluations of each specific ERU project. The outcomes have been reduced into Management Summary Charts found on p.8 of the report.

In the last decade, while facing increasingly complex “projects”, MSF-OCP has chosen to add means to improve its interventions. This results in the actual growth syndrome of MSF-OCP HQ departments, which is also significantly impacting country coordination (CC) set-ups and means. New scenarios should be tested, notably for mono-projects (to revise), the idea being to reduce CC set-ups whenever possible. Resources' analyses highlight the importance of competent persons to follow (coordinators & key positions), including PCs, with a clearer career path.

The evaluation of National Emergency Pools MSF-OCP in Nigeria, DRC, and Chad, show variable investments and interest by missions. In certain cases there is a true added value that is recognised by teams prepared and backed up by MSF Coordinations and Paris HQs (with or without the E-desk intervention). After several years of functionning, a clearer frame has to be defined: follow up of carrier path, ad-hoc trainings, technical back up notably for emergency interventions. Periods away from emegencies should allow to improve the emergency response set ups with NEPs.

Through an analysis of the events that have marked MSF’s history since 2003, this series of case studies and historical accounts describes the evolution of MSF's humanitarian ambitions, the resistance to these ambitions and the political arrangements that overcame this resistance (or that failed to do so).